‘From weird to wired’: MPs, the internet and representative politics in the UK

Ward, Stephen; Lusoli, Wainer

doi:10.1080/13572330500158276

Cited by 57 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Hence our choice of three clear categories on which we elaborate further and base our analysis. The online environment may be used by MEPs for an impression management linked to electoral imperatives (Ward & Lusoli, 2005). As suggested by Ward and Wring (2010), online platforms and technologies allow individual representatives to promote themselves directly to online publics.…”

Section: Three Strategies For Online Communicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Homestyle focuses on identifying communication priorities but dovetails with the broader concept of constituency service (Cain, Ferejohn & Fiorina, 1987) and, for online environments, e-representation (Coleman, 2007) E-representation concerns the extent to which the Internet supports the representative functions of elected members of parliaments within democratic nations (Jackson, 2003). Previous research has shown that e-representation is usually expressed in communication through the provision of information targeted towards specific voter groups, so using the Internet as a direct communication channel between the representative and a constituency (Bimber, 1998;Ward & Lusoli, 2005;Ward, Lusoli & Gibson, 2007) in order to explain their contribution to the area they represent within the legislature (Fenno, 1978;Denzau, Riker, & Shepsle, 1985). Despite trends in online communication moving towards a more interactive mode with the Web 2.0 era (Ward & Lusoli, 2005).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous research has shown that e-representation is usually expressed in communication through the provision of information targeted towards specific voter groups, so using the Internet as a direct communication channel between the representative and a constituency (Bimber, 1998;Ward & Lusoli, 2005;Ward, Lusoli & Gibson, 2007) in order to explain their contribution to the area they represent within the legislature (Fenno, 1978;Denzau, Riker, & Shepsle, 1985). Despite trends in online communication moving towards a more interactive mode with the Web 2.0 era (Ward & Lusoli, 2005). The online behaviour of parliamentarians may well be at odds with that of the online browser who may seek political information.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Online Political Communication Strategies: MEPs, E-Representation, and Self-Representation

Lilleker

Koc-Michalska

2013

Journal of Information Technology & Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

. Dr Lilleker's expertise is in public engagement in politics, and in particular how public engagement can be potentiated and facilitated using technological innovations. He has published widely on the professionalisation and marketisation of political communication including Political Campaigning, Elections and the Internet We find that a homestyle strategy predominates followed by impression management.

show abstract

Section: Three Strategies For Online Communicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Online Political Communication Strategies: MEPs, E-Representation, and Self-Representation

Lilleker

Koc-Michalska

2013

Journal of Information Technology & Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Namely, studies have assessed over a decade now the effectiveness of parliamentary websites as a public engagement tool, in the possibilities of information and interaction these offer (Norris, 2001;Trechsel et al, 2003;Setälä and Grönlund, 2006; Global Centre for ICT, 2008Griffith and Leston-Bandeira, 2012; J os hi and Ros enf i el d, 2013), with many more s t udi es f ocus i ng on t he effectiveness of individual MPs' websites (e.g. Zittel, 2003;Ward and Lusoli, 2005;Chappelet and Kilchenmann, 2006;Vicente-Merino, 2007;Francoli and Ward, 2008;Jackson, 2008). In this article we propose instead to analyse the processes in place that lead to the decisions behind public engagement outputs, such as a parliamentary website.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Pursuit of Legitimacy as a Key Driver for Public Engagement: The European Parliament Case

Leston‐Bandeira

2012

Parliamentary Affairs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Political disengagement and declining trust have become main areas of concern for parliaments in Europe, leading to a considerable reinforcement of public engagement activities. The European Parliament is a prime example of an institution where the need to strengthen the link with citizens became a key priority, in particular following the Lisbon Treaty's reinforcement of the parliament's powers and visibility. This article analyses the decision-making processes this Parliament has put in place to meet the public engagement agenda. It is mainly based on elite interviews with officials and representatives. We show that political will was key to move forward the public engagement agenda, and that new media has become a core element of this strategy.Key words: public engagement; trust in parliament; European Parliament; internet and parliament.Faced with rising levels of p o l i t i c a l d i s e n g a g e m e n t a n d a c c u s a t i o n s o f l a c k o f t r a n s p a r e n c y , parliaments across Europe have considerably reinforced their public engagement activities over the last decade, with many embedding this dimension into their overall strategies. As parliamentary public engagement has grown, the literature has started to analyse the effectiveness of the outputs produced by parliaments, such as petition systems or simply parliamentary websites. Namely, studies have assessed over a decade now the effectiveness of parliamentary websites as a public engagement tool, in the possibilities of information and interaction these offer (Norris, 2001;Trechsel et al, 2003;Setälä and Grönlund, 2006; Global Centre for ICT, 2008Griffith and Leston-Bandeira, 2012; J os hi and Ros enf i el d, 2013), with many more s t udi es f ocus i ng on t he effectiveness of individual MPs' websites (e.g. Zittel, 2003;Ward and Lusoli, 2005;Chappelet and Kilchenmann, 2006;Vicente-Merino, 2007;Francoli and Ward, 2008;Jackson, 2008). In this article we propose instead to analyse the processes in place that lead to the decisions behind public engagement outputs, such as a parliamentary website. Adopting the European Parliament as our case study, we explore the processes in place to support the development of public engagement and its inherent challenges. Whilst some of the literature has considered the structures in place to move forward the engagement agenda (Kelso, 2007;Leston-Bandeira, 2007b;De Rosa, 2009;Clark and Wilford, 2012; Walker 2012), we still need to understand better what processes lead to the development of public engagement, to ascertain who takes decisions regarding the format of public 2 engagement, the inherent challenges and what this can teach us in terms of developing effective public engagement. It is important in particular to identify the challenges in place to be able to set realistic expectations; but also to identify enablers of effective implementation of public engagement.Focusing on the output of a parliamentary website, we enquire into the decision-making process in place behind the decisions made ...

show abstract

“…In the UK, much of the 'peacetime' research has focused on content analyses of elected members' personal websites (e.g., Halstead, 2002;Jackson, 2003;Ward and Lusoli, 2005;Vicente-Merino, 2007;Goodchild et al, 2007). In these studies, whilst the parliamentarians themselves have tended to believe that their website is a useful tool for communicating with their constituents, the nature of this communication has been largely one-way, with few opportunities for constituents to enter into two-way, online dialogue with their representatives.…”

Section: The Information Needs and Behaviour Of The Parliamentarian Imentioning

confidence: 99%

Members of the Scottish Parliament on Twitter: good constituency men (and women)?

Baxter

Marcella

O'Shea³

2016

Aslib Journal of Information Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore the use of Twitter by Members of the Scottish Parliament (MSPs) for the provision of constituency-related information, or in support of their constituency service work. Design/methodology/approach – Content analysis of 10,411 tweets sent by the 105 MSPs on Twitter during four weeks in early-2014. Findings – While there was some evidence of MSPs on Twitter acting as a promoter of local community interests and as a conduit for information on local policy issues and events, their tweets were dominated by the wider, national, political agenda and by the Scottish independence debate. Compared with their online behaviour as parliamentary candidates three years earlier, MSPs placed an even greater emphasis on the one-way broadcast of information to their followers. They were reluctant to respond to contentious local policy questions, or to enter into any visible, meaningful, political debate with their constituents. Research limitations/implications – Although the research was conducted seven months before the Scottish independence referendum on 18 September 2014, the independence debate still dominated proceedings on Twitter. It might, therefore, be appropriate to revisit MSPs’ use of Twitter at some point during a truer “peacetime” period. Originality/value – This is the first systematic content analysis of tweets sent by all MSPs on Twitter. It allows the authors to compare their actual Twitter use with that envisaged by the Scottish Parliament, as a way of MSPs communicating about their work and engaging with their constituents.

show abstract

‘From weird to wired’: MPs, the internet and representative politics in the UK

Cited by 57 publications

References 14 publications

Online Political Communication Strategies: MEPs, E-Representation, and Self-Representation

Online Political Communication Strategies: MEPs, E-Representation, and Self-Representation

The Pursuit of Legitimacy as a Key Driver for Public Engagement: The European Parliament Case

Members of the Scottish Parliament on Twitter: good constituency men (and women)?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About